@jonny1000
I see how you are picturing this now. You imagine that support for Classic might rise to 75% at some point and then get immediately activated the moment support even once rises to this level. So technically at that moment in time 25% would still be opposed (or just not bothering to switch).
One problem you have not addressed:
What could you mean by saying that the opposition will be "locked in"? You'll have a hard time convincing me that people are unable to decide they like Classic after the activation.
It appears Classic just does what we all thought it did: activate whenever at least 75% support is reached ("at least" is warranted, because support may already have been >75% from the start, for all Gavin knew).
By the way, the idea that "we have to go through 750 blocks to get to 751, meaning the 'at least' in the BIP is a typo" is actually incorrect. It's not a typo. It's necessary to include "at least," because if the very first, say, 999 blocks that were able to flag Classic support already contained 800 blocks flagging support, we would have reached 800 out of 1000 without ever going through 750 out of 1000. We would have gone through perhaps 750/900, but not 750/1000. Nevertheless, this may be irrelevant now since we are past that first 1000-block window. EDIT: And actually, real miner support could surge discontinuously in a much shorter time window, even though this can't be fully reflected in the blocks (at most we can get 750/750). So really I think that aspect of your claim completely evaporates under scrunity.
I won't call you a troll for getting this wrong and leading me on a brief wild goose chase, as I realize that is part of argumentation and I'm not going to assume you wouldn't make such an error, since I see why one could easily make it; it's easy to lose track of context when dealing with numbers (not to mention that I might still somehow be wrong in saying you are wrong).
@all
I see no reason whatsoever to think @jonny1000 is trolling. He's merely exhibiting the normal signs of a human, error prone as we all are, surrounded by people who disagree with him on several highly contentious issues. Perhaps not many of you have had the pleasure of solo-posting in hostile territory. Being wrong and not seeing one's own inconsistencies wastes people's time, yes, but that isn't trolling, it's just debating. Pushing for substantiation, misinterpreting people, being unclear, failing to address points made...all that wastes time but isn't trolling. We all do these things, and we'd end up doing them all the more in a 10-against-1 situation. It is rare to find someone who doesn't soon seem annoying when arguing against a position we hold dear; their reasoning flaws and disingenuity are put into sharp relief for us in a way that the same flaws of someone we agree with would usually not be. If @jonny1000 were hurling insults and being highly weasely while making a few substantial attempts at argument I'd still credit him for the effort, yet his behavior has been far above that. Even supposing he was sent by Adam Back (who does argue like a weasel pretty often) to mess with us, it's still good practice and avoids the bubble effect Core suffers from. I have already learned quite a few things about the small blockist and Kore Konsensus mindset
(Consider that in Core's turf spelling Core with a K would be used as evidence that I'm trolling, but no one would assume that here. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. Too easy to have a double standard, forgetting this is home court for us.)
I see how you are picturing this now. You imagine that support for Classic might rise to 75% at some point and then get immediately activated the moment support even once rises to this level. So technically at that moment in time 25% would still be opposed (or just not bothering to switch).
One problem you have not addressed:
What could you mean by saying that the opposition will be "locked in"? You'll have a hard time convincing me that people are unable to decide they like Classic after the activation.
It appears Classic just does what we all thought it did: activate whenever at least 75% support is reached ("at least" is warranted, because support may already have been >75% from the start, for all Gavin knew).
By the way, the idea that "we have to go through 750 blocks to get to 751, meaning the 'at least' in the BIP is a typo" is actually incorrect. It's not a typo. It's necessary to include "at least," because if the very first, say, 999 blocks that were able to flag Classic support already contained 800 blocks flagging support, we would have reached 800 out of 1000 without ever going through 750 out of 1000. We would have gone through perhaps 750/900, but not 750/1000. Nevertheless, this may be irrelevant now since we are past that first 1000-block window. EDIT: And actually, real miner support could surge discontinuously in a much shorter time window, even though this can't be fully reflected in the blocks (at most we can get 750/750). So really I think that aspect of your claim completely evaporates under scrunity.
I won't call you a troll for getting this wrong and leading me on a brief wild goose chase, as I realize that is part of argumentation and I'm not going to assume you wouldn't make such an error, since I see why one could easily make it; it's easy to lose track of context when dealing with numbers (not to mention that I might still somehow be wrong in saying you are wrong).
@all
I see no reason whatsoever to think @jonny1000 is trolling. He's merely exhibiting the normal signs of a human, error prone as we all are, surrounded by people who disagree with him on several highly contentious issues. Perhaps not many of you have had the pleasure of solo-posting in hostile territory. Being wrong and not seeing one's own inconsistencies wastes people's time, yes, but that isn't trolling, it's just debating. Pushing for substantiation, misinterpreting people, being unclear, failing to address points made...all that wastes time but isn't trolling. We all do these things, and we'd end up doing them all the more in a 10-against-1 situation. It is rare to find someone who doesn't soon seem annoying when arguing against a position we hold dear; their reasoning flaws and disingenuity are put into sharp relief for us in a way that the same flaws of someone we agree with would usually not be. If @jonny1000 were hurling insults and being highly weasely while making a few substantial attempts at argument I'd still credit him for the effort, yet his behavior has been far above that. Even supposing he was sent by Adam Back (who does argue like a weasel pretty often) to mess with us, it's still good practice and avoids the bubble effect Core suffers from. I have already learned quite a few things about the small blockist and Kore Konsensus mindset
(Consider that in Core's turf spelling Core with a K would be used as evidence that I'm trolling, but no one would assume that here. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. Too easy to have a double standard, forgetting this is home court for us.)
Last edited:
